TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent : Shri Satish Modi, AR ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM: These appeals by Revenue are arising out of the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai in Appeal Nos. CIT(A)-47/AP.34,35,36,42/14-15 even dated 14.09.2017. The Assessments were framed by the Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 Mumbai (in short ACIT/ITO/ AO) for AYs 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 vide even dated 28.03.2014 under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act ). 2. The only common issue in these four appeals of Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition made by AO on account of undisclosed receipts noted on seized documents found during the course of search and seizure action under section 132 of the Act in the case of Lalit Jobanputra Group on 19.08.2011. The facts and circumstances are identical in all the four years and issue is common. Even the grounds raised by Revenue in all the four years are identically worded and hence, will take the facts from AY 2008-09 in ITA No 7042/Mum/2017 and will decide the issue. The grounds raised in AY 2008-09 reads as under: - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the course of search. It was explained before the CIT(A) that the entries recorded on page No. 23 to 25 and 26 of Annexure 2 are the assessee s audited finance statements and are not of any incriminating nature. He stated that the figures relate to Flyjac and JWC have been found to match with the respective audited books of account have not been a subject matter of any addition by the AO in the original assessment. He stated that by virtue of very nature of business of assessee of a IATA Air Carbo Agent, where no transaction can bypass IATA or remains unrecorded, it is not possible to contend that the assessee has earn huge undisclosed receipt out of its books of accounts. Hence, these were not incriminating material. The CIT(A) also referred the copies of documents being additional evidences in the form of copies of Airline Accounts, Airline Commission Account, Airline Incentive Account and Airline Due Agent account together with the Cargo Sales Report (CSR) and these evidences were referred to the AO by the CIT(A) vide letter No. CIT(A)-47/JAC Air Services/Rem/Rep./2017-18 dated 22.08.2017. The AO despite the numerous opportunities and sufficient time to conduct the verif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rein the DCIT and CPIO, Centrals Circle (1)(2), Mumbai vide an order stating as under: - The petitioner vide his application dated 25.06.2019 has requested for a copy of the Satisfaction Note on the basis of which income tax assessment in the case of M/s Jac Air Services Pvt. Ltd. was completed under section 143(3) read with section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. The information requested is provided as under: (i) It is hereby informed that the Satisfaction Note, as requested by the applicant, on the basis of which income tax assessment in the case of M/s. Jac Air Services Pvt. Ltd, was completed under section 143(3) read with section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, is not available on record. However, the reasons for issue of notice under section 153C of the Act has been already incorporated by the assessing officer in the assessment orders passed under section 143(3) read with section 153C of the Act for the aforesaid assessment years. Hence, this may be considered as information furnished. 2. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO of the 'other person' to acquire jurisdiction. Unless such jurisdictional condition is satisfied, there can be no question of making assessment or reassessment of the 'other person.' Subsequently, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (in short CBDT) vide Circular No. 24/2015 F. No. 273/Misc./140/2015/TTJ dated 31-12-2015 for implementation of the judgment in the case of Calcutta Knitwears (Supra), has explained the procedure in case the AO of the search person and the the other person is one at the same then also he is required to record his satisfaction as has been held by the Courts. 8. The relevant circular issued by CBDT reads as under: - Subject: Recording of satisfaction note under section 158BD/153C of the Act - reg.- The issue of recording of satisfaction for the purposes of section 158BD/ 153C has been subject matter of litigation. 2. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Calcutta Knitwears in its detailed judgment in Civil Appeal No.3958 of 2014 dated 12.3.20 14(available in MRS at 2014-LL-0312-5 1) has laid down that for the purpose of Section 158BD of the Act, recording of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esh High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mechmen (2016) 380 ITR 591 (MP) wherein the view is expressed in the following manner: - 18. The concomitant of this conclusion, is that, the legal position as applicable to Section 158BD regarding satisfaction in the first instance of the first Assessing Officer forwarding the items to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction; and in the second instance of the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction whilst sending notice to such other person (other than the person referred to in Section 153A), must apply proprio vigore. The fact that incidentally the Assessing Officer is common at both the stages would not extricate him from recording satisfaction at the respective stages. In that, the Assessing Officer is satisfied that the items referred to in Section 153C belongs or belong to a person (other than the person referred to in Section 153A), being sine qua non. He cannot assume jurisdiction to transmit those items to another file which incidentally is pending before him concerning other person (person other than the person referred to in Section 153A). The question as to whether that may influence the opinion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
